Unit 4 Readings and Thoughts

Blogs in Chronological Order


Oyez 1992  
Valley of the Shadow 1993

Dickinson 1994

American Memory 1994

Romantic Circles 1996

Amiens Cathedral Project 1996

Shenandoah at War 1996?

Life Outtacontext 1999

Hawthorne in Salem 2002

Persepolis 2003

Eye Level 2005

Journey Through Hallowed Ground 2005

Hurricane Digital Memory Bank 2005

Avalon Project 2008

Digital Karnak 2008

In Our Path 2008

April 16 Archive 2011

Lascaux 2013

  
There are clear design, interface, accessibility, view-ability, etc... improvements with the sites over the years, but some have received continuous upgrades, so it is hard to compare their current face with their original site.  Some of the sites that seem newer, are actually older (ie: the Amiens Cathedral Project).  At first look, this Amiens site looks modern and sleek, but it actually has limited interfaces asides from viewing pictures within the site.  I had to research outside the site to learn about its origins.  A useful lesson learned is to add dates in the "About" sections to let readers know when a site started.  Its recent posts may mask its age.  The Lascaux site was first created in 1998, but was redesigned with its 3D tour in 2013.  It looks modern and is useful (once you figure out how to switch on the English text, or speak French).  Early sites often served as databases or archives, but newer sites seem more interactive, and have interaction options. 


Additional Historical Sites of Interest:

http://eservice.pwcgov.org/library/digitalLibrary/   Prince William Public Library System's Digital Library. 

http://www2.vcdh.virginia.edu/civilwar/index.php?section=Tredegar&page=Home  The American Civil War Center.  

https://acwm.org/  The American Civil War Museum.  


Thoughts on this Unit's Readings

"The digital humanities is not about building, it’s about sharing." Posted on May 25, 2011 by Mark Sample http://www.samplereality.com/2011/05/25/the-digital-humanities-is-not-about-building-its-about-sharing/


"The heart of the digital humanities is not the production of knowledge; it’s the reproduction of knowledge." 

"The promise is in the way the digital reshapes the representation, sharing, and discussion of knowledge. We are no longer bound by the physical demands of printed books and paper journals, no longer constrained by production costs and distribution friction, no longer hampered by a top-down and unsustainable business model..."

"But I can also imagine less predictable outcomes. More experimental, more peculiar. Equally as valuable though—even more so—than typical monographs or essays..."

"There are no limits. And to every person who objects, But, wait, what about legitimacy/tenure/cost/labor/& etc, I say, you are missing the point. Now is not the time to hem in our own possibilities. Now is not the time to base the future on the past. Now is not the time to be complacent, hesitant, or entrenched in the present."

Mark Sample offers a forward looking view of the positives of digital media while acknowledging the challenges and debates. Digital media reduces/eliminates gatekeepers such as publishers, journals, and industry.  It allows the author/creator to share and connect with his or her audience via the means of his or her choice. The book/publishing industry is still dealing with e-books and print on demand which have allowed non-traditional or "amateur" authors to release books, short stories, novels, etc...  Some argue that gatekeepers serve a valuable role in quality control and editing, which is true to a point, but self-published authors can hire their own editors.  That said, many in industry and academia still seem to look down upon self-publishing, despite some authors' great successes.  Sample is right to promote digital media, but it is still a tool, and not a silver bullet.


Cohen and Rosenzweig, Chapter 1.  Items of Interest and My Thoughts and Comments:

1.  The authors advise that new history writers immerse themselves in the field and understand the different styles, audiences, forms, etc...  This is good advice for an author in any field.

2.  The authors wrote, "...it took quite some time before my colleagues accepted this as an academic venture.”  This seems similar to Prof. Evans' comments on trying to get his peers at NVCC to embrace digital history and media.  It may be interesting, but what is the value to the professionals?

3.  Early digital history focused on physical media such as CD's.  I remember getting encyclopedia and subject specific CDs as a child.  Those materials have all moved to the web now.

4.  It is interesting that amateurs, not professional historians, were the early advocates and leaders for digital history.  This is likely the case in many fields, as new voices disrupt the status quo and are not tied to existing tech or forms.  Professionals who succeeded must balance their current platforms with new venues.

5. Can algorithms and vast databases can offer more info and "better" searches than human cataloged sites?

6.  Paywalls and data "hidden" inside databases are not always accessible to wide audiences.

7.  A short search of history sites shows that many are still tied to commercial activities such as History Channel, selling magazines or books, etc...

8.  "The past decade has seen the emergence of five main genres of history websites that follow preexisting patterns and categories: archives (containing primary sources); exhibits, films, scholarship, and essays (that is, secondary sources); teaching (directed at students and teachers); discussion (focused on online dialogue); and organizational (providing information about a historical group)."

9.  Knowing your audience and the what/why of your site is crucial to its success. 

10.  Many sites are "amateur" sites, and use methods that traditional historians or archivists would not use. 

11.  The costs of digitizing and maintaining digital history and media serve as a barrier to entry for some, and corporations and government often have to take action to assist.

12.  Copyright laws and protections restrict/limit sharing most 20th century products.

13.  Many sites "simply translate" existing products and media into a digital form.  This may not be innovative, but it is important and it shares the products wider.

14.  The authors suggest that the web undercuts many parts of the museum experience, but can still serve to broaden their audiences and breadth. 

15. Authors can publish a piece, and then share the resource/research materials on the web.  I think this is a useful concept.  In addition to a bibliography or citations, the authors can show, not tell, their sources.

16.  The low entry costs for a blog or website allow anyone to produce material, commentary, analysis, etc..  One can assume that their motivations are pure, but how can we know?  Further, these authors may lack traditional credentials, but their opinions or analysis may be worth reading. 
 
17.  More sites are focusing or providing resources for teaching.  I think this is a positive, as many friends/family that say they do not like history is because they thought history classes were boring.

18.  Museums, events, sites, etc... must have a digital site with operating hours, directions/address, summary of content available, etc... if they want to draw a wider audience.